Why are we still in salary cap hell?

[Risen Star]

You retain the strength of your team. Leary should be resigned. When he's not, we've lost the offseason.

 

[Verdict]

Keeping a player who underperforms his contract on defense isn't really helping the defense. Some of you would call that a progress stopper.

 

[CowboyMike]

Well, how is it advantaheous when the team indicates that they will not have the money to bring in a significant free agency upgrade? Not even one? That doesn't really add up, does it?

There is a difference between not being able to sign a big free agent and not wanting to. The team does not want to sign big free agents. It's simply not part of the philosophy anymore.

Besides, any big name we would have signed would just be ammunition down the line when they inevitably underperform their huge contract and you complain that we over spent for them.

 

[LocimusPrime]

We are already paying too much to keep this offensive line together...teams get by with less expensive offensive lines and win. But it's too late to change that, we drafted them..now we got to pay

 

[Verdict]

There is a difference between not being able to sign a big free agent and not wanting to. The team does not want to sign big free agents. It's simply not part of the philosophy anymore.

Besides, any big name we would have signed would just be ammunition down the line when they inevitably underperform their huge contract and you complain that we over spent for them.

Every team WANTS to sign free agents, and particularly the best free agents to improve our team. To say otherwise is not remotely credible.

The question is why haven't we, since Jerry HAS the money to do it? The obvious reason why we haven't is the salary cap.

In the truest sense, it is correct to say we COULD probably sign any free agent we want to if we wanted a player badly enough. The problem is that doing that would cripple our cap going forward.

So, it seems that we CANT do it without crippling our cap. I don't know about you, but that sure sounds like we don't have the practical cap room to sign the premier free agents. That sounds like our cap is constrained I don't know how anyone could argue otherwise.

If you think the team doesn't WANT to sign any high priced free agents I want some of what you are smoking. We wanted to manipulate the cap badly enough that we, along with the Commanders violated the fictitious salary cap in the uncapped year and were penalized for it.

It is pretty silly to think we have tons of cap room just laying around waiting to be used and no one to spend it on, when one of our top 10 players is getting ready to walk out the door in Ron Leary.

If you think we don't WANT to keep Ron Leary, then I am afraid you are misguided my friend.

 

[Verdict]

We are already paying too much to keep this offensive line together...teams get by with less expensive offensive lines and win. But it's too late to change that, we drafted them..now we got to pay

Who cares where other teams choose to spend their cap assets. Every team is built differently. Our identity is the offensive line.

Your thought process is why teams overpay for average to below average players because the market says what the going rate for a position or position group should be.

If Tom Brady is worth say 15 to 20 million does that make Sam Bradford worth the same? What about Tyrod Taylor? Fitzpatrick?

You pay to keep talent on your roster. You can't pay a guard 20 million per year. But what someone else is paying their players is irrelevant as to how we should pay our players.

One might argue that we should resign Leary and draft a right tackle in the first and let every one of our cbs go and replace them every year in the draft.

If you could draft serviceable corners every year you could put it all in the OL and DL if you wanted to. Every team is different and it's all about how and when you want to spend your cap dollars.

 

[BotchedLobotomy]

Get it thru your thick head......they don't want to sign Leary and his explosive knees

I can say with 100% certainty that you do not know this as a fact, this is pure speculation on your part, which makes your "get it thru your thick head" comment even more childish.

 

[dallasdave]

Stephen Jones Scoffs.......Scoffs I tell you, at this notion.

 

[dallasdave]

Patriots are at 104 million in contracts. They got like 70 million in space before the cap goes up another 10. But they don't pay much for anything. Wide receivers....nope. O line.....nope. Running backs...nope.

I wonder if Bill is getting a cut of the salary cap savings. Like 10%




As far as the Cowboys...we are good! We got the space to make things happen

Happen like get the Cowboys ready to win Super Bowl 52

 

[Longboysfan]

Patriots are at 104 million in contracts. They got like 70 million in space before the cap goes up another 10. But they don't pay much for anything. Wide receivers....nope. O line.....nope. Running backs...nope.

I wonder if Bill is getting a cut of the salary cap savings. Like 10%




As far as the Cowboys...we are good! We got the space to make things happen

Reminder - Teams have to pay out a minimum in contracts each year.
If not those monies go back to the NFL to be redistributed to all the players.

 

[NorthwestDallas40]

You retain the strength of your team. Leary should be resigned. When he's not, we've lost the offseason.

No

 

[GhostOfPelluer]

That's a great argument. I agree with it somewhat. But having Witten around has an opportunity cost and that cost is Leary.

Witten isn't a very good blocker anymore. Hanna can do everything he does a hell of a lot cheaper. In fact Swaim may also be better than Witten and he was a late round pick. Witten is like a sacred cow around here.

There's a chance Hanna never plays again. Swaim is coming off a season-ending injury. Witten is like a sacred cow around here, you're right about that, but he also produces regardless of his current 40 time. He's also almost never hurt, which matters.

 

[Stash]

Sure Crawford would be better making $5m as opposed to the $7m he is supposed to make. If Crawford was not here he would be replaced by someone else given that he has been a starter and we would have to pay that guy.

It still does not make sense to be paying over a quarter of your cap on the 5 players starting at OL. You need to field a defense.

"Fielding a defense" is one thing. Paying an average of $9 million to a guy in Crawford - who they're actively looking to replace - is quite another.

The DE's that they desperately need and are looking to acquire are so necessary because guys like Crawford aren't getting the job done. Heck, even now, an undrafted player like David Irving provides an upgrade in productivity.

Fielding a defense is only that much harder when you're overpaying players who aren't producing relative to what they're being paid, offense or defense.

 

[Stash]

Ask yourself would you rather have Leary, who is a top player in his prime who would probably play out a 4 year contract, Jason Witten at his cap number or Crawford at his cap hit?

Leary is worth more than either one of those guys at the cap hit each one carries.

No argument from me on that. I'd dump the Crawford contract in a second if it was up to me. But some people have a tough time admitting mistakes.

An argument could be made that Leary had a Pro Bowl worthy season. You certainly can't say the same for Crawford. And, again, it's not all on him, he's a round peg they're trying to fit into a square hole.

You could trade Collins for a draft pick, or picks, and it would be a wash and keep the team on track. Instead we pay Dez $70 million to disappear in big games, Witten for a feel good story, and Crawford for his versatility (jack of all trades-master of none).

I'm not trading Collins and betraying the young man's trust that he placed in me in choosing the Cowboys. But I'm not reworking Bryant's deal when he's not earning what he's being paid now. Hopefully, that turns around, but right now I'm leaving myself an out on his deal.

Everyone talks about how easy these restructures are, and then try to defend disappointing play like Crawford's because the team reworked his deal and are essentially stuck with him. There's always a cost for kicking that can down the road.

 

[Nightman]

I can say with 100% certainty that you do not know this as a fact, this is pure speculation on your part, which makes your "get it thru your thick head" comment even more childish.

We'll see and then you can stuff it...hows that for childish

 

[Nightman]

There's a chance Hanna never plays again. Swaim is coming off a season-ending injury. Witten is like a sacred cow around here, you're right about that, but he also produces regardless of his current 40 time. He's also almost never hurt, which matters.

Talk about the grass is greener disorder......now Hanna and Swaim are better than Witten

What they don't understand is that we can have them all.....this idea of destroying guys to sign other guys is not needed..... DAL has just committed to less FAs and more extensions....Leary would normally be a re-sign but we got a gift with Collins so he is gone and we will get a comp pick

If TWill and Church and Carr get signed elsewhere we will probably go the comp pick route and go for four....that will severely limit our FA spending to players that were cut and players after May 15th

 

[Toruk_Makto]

The real question is, how are the Eagles NOT in salary cap hell. Bunch of guys cut and no repercussions

Lack of paid talent.

 

[Fletch]

It's not as bad as you hear some people say on the national front.

Neither is it nearly as giddy as some here try to imagine.

The national media looks at the numbers at face-value.

 

[Stash]

The national media looks at the numbers at face-value.

And fans try to make it a rosier colored picture than it truly is too. Two sides of the same coin.

It's not nearly as dire as some think, while not nearly as good as some will try to tell you it is. The truth lies in the middle.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

"Fielding a defense" is one thing. Paying an average of $9 million to a guy in Crawford - who they're actively looking to replace - is quite another.

The DE's that they desperately need and are looking to acquire are so necessary because guys like Crawford aren't getting the job done. Heck, even now, an undrafted player like David Irving provides an upgrade in productivity.

Fielding a defense is only that much harder when you're overpaying players who aren't producing relative to what they're being paid, offense or defense.

Stop it with the scapegoating please. Cutting Crawford saves no money and you still need to replace him too. Even if you cut Crawford's salary in half which is the best case scenario it does not make it sensible to pay 30% of your cap to 4 players in one position group.

I understand your concern over Crawford's deal but it is the only one on the roster. There is nothing to be done about it until next year and the concern moving forward should be not doing the same deals again. For example they should not overpay for McClain for one good year.

If you want to sign our key UFA like McClain plus get help for the secondary and receiving corps as well as get one of JPP, Sheard, or Campbell and still give Martin the contract he deserves then you need to let Leary go. The consolation prize is a fat compensatory pick.